Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #162715

Re: Usage of static in array declaration

Show all headers | View raw

"james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
> On Friday, September 10, 2021 at 10:39:06 AM UTC-4, Thiago Adams wrote:
>> It is not clear to me why this static was created and 
>> what is the behavior. 
>> 
>> For instance, 
>> void F(char name[static 10]){ 
>> } 
>> 
>> Can I pass a pointer to char*?
>
> Sure. If you ignore the "static", that declaration is equivalent to "char *name".
> The static keyword imposes restrictions on the values that you can safely
> pass to the function, but has no effect on the types that you can pass.
>
> "If the keyword static also appears within the [ and ] of the array type
> derivation, then for each call to the function, the value of the corresponding
> actual argument shall provide access to the first element of an array with at
> least as many elements as specified by the size expression." (6.7.6.3p7).
>
> Note that this is a "shall" that does not occur in a constraints section. As
> such, code which violates this "shall" has undefined behavior (4p2). No
> diagnostic is required. This is because it could be arbitrarily difficult to
> determine at compile time whether or not that is the case. However, good
> quality implementation should generate a diagnostic whenever they can
> determine that it is violated, and that optional diagnostic is, in my opinion,
> the main justification for this feature. I've heard it claimed that it enables
> optimizations, but I've never heard an explanation of what those
> optimizations might be.

Right.  All the "static" keyword does is cause some calls to have
undefined behavior that would not have UB if the "static" were removed.

A naive compiler can treat `char name[static 10]` as exactly equivalent
to `char name[]` or `char *name`.

A sufficiently clever compiler can use the `static 10` to warn about
possible undefined behavior (though there will always be cases where it
can't do so reliably) and generate code in a way that assumes the
behavior is well defined.

For example:

    void F(char name[static 10]) {
        if (name != NULL) {
            /* ... */
        }
    }

An optimizing compiler could remove the NULL check.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Philips
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Usage of static in array declaration Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2021-09-10 07:38 -0700
  Re: Usage of static in array declaration Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-10 07:58 -0700
    Re: Usage of static in array declaration Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2021-09-10 09:17 -0700
      Re: Usage of static in array declaration Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2021-09-10 09:37 -0700
      Re: Usage of static in array declaration "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-10 09:46 -0700
  Re: Usage of static in array declaration "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-10 08:32 -0700
    Re: Usage of static in array declaration Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-10 11:26 -0700

csiph-web